We felt we could not trust anyone
A couple at the centre of a legal battle to keep their newborn son have spoken of the Big Brother-style scrutiny they faced while in an assessment centre.
As reported in the Evening News, Nicky and Mark Webster were told they could take their five-year-old son Brandon home to Cromer in a landmark case at the High Court's family division.
The case was the first time a gagging order was lifted in a family court, and Mr Justice Munby also gave permission for Norfolk County Council to reveal details of the abuse it was claimed the couple's other three children, known as child A, B, and C, suffered.
The couple, previously known as the Hardinghams, fled to Ireland to give birth to Brandon amid fears he would be taken for adoption as their other three children were. But Nicky, 26, and Mark, 33, were today heading back in Norfolk with their son following Mr Justice Munby's decision to allow Brandon home subject to a care plan being worked out between the parents and the county council.
In an interview with a national Sunday newspaper Mr Webster, a fork-lift driver, said: “It has been so difficult because we haven't been able to say what we've been going through. Our priority has always been Brandon and for his sake we've submitted to every require-ment social services placed on us. But it has been hard to feel that we disappeared and hard to live with the fear that Brandon would be taken away at any time.”
The couple, who spent the last few months in an assessment centre with Brandon, talked of their ordeal in the centre, which still cannot be named.
“At first it was difficult to adjust to life there,” said Mrs Webster. “Neither Mark, nor I, nor our families, felt we could trust anyone official. We'd lost so much before, why should this time be different?”
She said the Big Brother-style CCTV cameras at the centre patrolled the building and zoomed in every time a baby cried or there was a bang, shout, or scream. The couple were watched by staff as they carried out childcare and attended group sessions where they were taught how to be good parents.
Mrs Webster said: “The first time they said, 'Right, leave Brandon in the creche and come to the session' I refused. I was so scared that if I left him he would be gone when I came back.”
Mr Justice Munby said in court last week that it may be possible for Brandon to live at home permanently with his parents providing there are no problems.
“It isn't over,” said Mrs Webster. “The final decision will be made next June and it is hard to have any confidence or faith after what we've been through - but we have to keep going.”
The couple met when Mrs Webster was 13 and they formed a relationship when she was 16. After the birth of their first child, A, they separated for a year. Then they reunited and married. In April 2003 they separated again until September 2004, but both parents helped out with childcare.
As reported last week, Lisa Christensen, director of children's services at Norfolk County Council, said it was the judge who decided on the best interests of the couple's other three children. “Our priority has always been putting the best interests of Brandon first,” she said. “Our view is that Brandon should be allowed home with Mr and Mrs Webster, with continued supervision and support from us and others before a final decision is made about his future.”
According to the Norfolk County Council papers published after Friday's High Court hearing, child B had suffered six fractures including a rib fracture caused by “forceful squeezing” and other fractures caused by “forceful twisting”, while child A had suffered “clinical and emotional harm”. The council felt the children were at “risk of significant harm” and took them for adoption. The couple claim the fractures were a result of brittle bone disease, which they say runs in the mother's family. However, the council statement says the couple's own paediatric radiologist disagreed.
Ü Have you got a story to tell? Call Peter Walsh on 01603 772439 or e-mail peter.walsh@archant.co.uk